Cover not available
Article published In:
Applying Embodied Cognition and Cognitive Linguistics to language teaching
Edited by Paolo Della Putta and Ferran Suñer
[Review of Cognitive Linguistics 21:1] 2023
► pp. 266–292
Regular articles

L2 English learners’ verb lexicalization of motion events

Effects of proficiency and salience of manner

 | Seoul National University
 | Gyeongin National University of Education
This study examines the effects of L2 proficiency and manner salience on English learners’ verb lexicalization of spontaneous motion events. Three proficiency groups of L1 Korean learners of L2 English were asked to describe spontaneous motion situations, and their use of verbs was compared to that of native English speakers. Results indicate that L2 learners’ verb lexicalization was heavily influenced by the typological patterns of their native language, but the development of target-like lexicalization patterns occurred even though it plateaued at a certain acquisitional phase. Moreover, it was found that the degree of adopting target-like lexicalization patterns varied by manner-of-motion types (i.e., high-salience manner such as swim versus low-salience manner such as walk) in all three learner groups, implying that the inherent salience of manner has an impact on L2 lexicalization of spontaneous motion.
Keywords: verb lexicalization, framing typology, motion event, proficiency, inherent salience of manner
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Lexicalization of motion events
    • 2.1Motion expressions and salience of manner
    • 2.2L2 Learners’ lexicalization of motion events
  • 3.The study
    • 3.1Motion verbs in Korean and English
    • 3.2Participants
    • 3.3Material
    • 3.4Test and coding procedure
  • 4.Results
    • 4.1Verb-lexicalization patterns by L2 proficiency
    • 4.2Salience effects
  • 5.Discussion
    • 5.1Verb lexicalization of L2 proficiency groups
    • 5.2Effects of inherent salience of manner
    • 5.3Pedagogical implications
  • 6.Conclusion
  • References
Published online: 2 February 2023
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/rcl.00134.jeo
References (67)
References
Archibald, J., Roy, S., Harmel, S., Jesney, K., Dewey, E., Moisik, S., & Lessard, R. (2006). A review of the literature on second language learning (2nd Ed.). Alberta: Alberta Education.Google Scholar
Brown, A. (2015). Universal development and L1–L2 convergence in bilingual construal of manner in speech and gesture in Mandarin, Japanese, and English. The Modern Language Journal, 99 (S1), 66–82. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brown, A., & Chen, J. (2013). Construal of manner in speech and gesture in Mandarin, English, and Japanese. Cognitive Linguistics, 24 (4), 605–631. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bylund, E., & Athanasopoulos, P. (2015). Televised Whorf: Cognitive restructuring in advanced foreign language learners as a function of audiovisual media exposure. The Modern Language Journal, 99 (1), 123–137. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cadierno, T. (2004). Expressing motion events in a second language: A cognitive typological perspective. In M. Achard & S. Niemeier (Eds.), Cognitive linguistics, second language acquisition, and foreign language teaching (pp. 13–49). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2010). Motion in Danish as a second language: Does the learner’s L1 make difference? In Z. Han & T. Cadierno (Eds.), Linguistic relativity in second language acquisition: Thinking for speaking (pp. 1–33). Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2017). Thinking for speaking about motion in a second language: Looking back and forward. In I. Ibarretxe-Antuñano (Ed.), Motion and space across languages and applications (pp. 279–300). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cadierno, T., & Lund, K. (2004). Cognitive linguistics and second language acquisition: Motion events in a typological framework. In B. VanPatten, J. Williams & S. Rott (Eds.), Form-meaning connections in second language acquisition (pp. 147–162). Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Cadierno, T., & Ruiz, L. (2006). Motion events in Spanish L2 acquisition. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 4 (1), 183–216. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cherry, L. (2000). The great kapok tree: A tale of the Amazon rain forest. San Diego, CA: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.Google Scholar
Choi, S. (2011). Language-specificity of motion event expressions in young Korean children. Language, Interaction and Acquisition, 2 (1), 157–184. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Choi, S., & Bowerman, M. (1991). Learning to express motion events in English and Korean: The influence of language-specific lexicalization patterns. Cognition, 41 (1–3), 83–121. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Choi, S., & Lantolf, J. P. (2008). Representation and embodiment of meaning in L2 communication: Motion events in the speech and gesture of advanced L2 Korean and L2 English speakers. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 30 (2), 191–224. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ellis, N. C., & Ferreira–Junior, F. (2009). Construction learning as a function of frequency, frequency distribution, and function. The Modern Language Journal, 93 (3), 370–385. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Feist, M., Rojo, A., & Cifuentes, P. (2007). Salience and acceptability in Spanish manner verbs: A preliminary view. International Journal of English studies, 7 (1), 137–148.Google Scholar
Filipović, L. (2011). Speaking and remembering in one or two languages: Bilingual vs. monolingual lexicalization and memory for motion events. International Journal of Bilingualism, 15 (4), 466–485. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Flecken, M., Carroll, M., Weimar, K., & Von Stutterheim, C. (2015). Driving along the road or heading for the village? Conceptual differences underlying motion event encoding in French, German, and French-German L2 users. The Modern Language Journal, 99 (S1), 100–122. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Freleng, F. (1950). Canary row [Film, animated cartoon]. New York: Time Warner.Google Scholar
Gennari, S. P., Sloman, S. A., Malt, B. C., & Fitch, W. T. (2002). Motion events in language and cognition. Cognition, 83 (1), 49–79. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goldberg, A. E. (1995). Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
(2006). Constructions at work: The nature of generalization in language. New York, US: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gorsuch, R. L. (1983). Factor analysis (2nd Ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Ham, S., Lee, Y., Kim, H., Park, S., Park, J., Ahn, S., Eun, J., Lee, J., Ihm, N., Chung, S., & Reichmuth, H. (2014). Elementary school English 3. Seoul, Korea: Chunjae Education.Google Scholar
Hasko, V. (2010). Motion domains of motion in Russian and English: Corpus-based analysis. In V. Hasko & R. Perelmutter (Eds.), New approaches to Slavic verbs of motion (pp. 197–224). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Harley, B. (1989). Transfer in the written compositions of French immersion students. In H. W. Dechert & M. Raupach (Eds.), Transfer in language production (pp. 3–19). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Harley, B., & King, M. L. (1989). Verb lexis in the written compositions of young L2 learners. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 11 (4), 415–439. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hickmann, M., Engemann, H., Soroli, E., Hendriks, H., & Vincent, C. (2017). Expressing and categorizing motion in French and English: Verbal and non-verbal cognition across languages. In I. Ibarretxe-Antuñano (Ed.), Motion and space across languages: Theory and applications (pp. 61–94). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Im, S. (2002). Typological patterns of motion verbs in Korean. Discourse and Cognition, 9 (1), 123–150.Google Scholar
Ji, Y., & Hohenstein, J. (2014). The syntactic packaging of caused motion components in a second language: English learners of Chinese. Lingua, 140 1, 100–116. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kim, H., & Rah, Y. (2021). Applying constructionist approaches to teaching English argument structure constructions to EFL learners. TESOL Quarterly, 55 (2), 568–592. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kim, S. (2009). Thinking-for-speaking patterns of Korean ESL speakers: L2 speech and gesture in motion events. Studies in English Education, 14 (2), 109–127.Google Scholar
(2010). Gesture in a second language: Resources for communication and cognitive mediation. Doctoral dissertation, University of Wisconsin-Madison, US.
(2014). L2 gestures and thinking-for-speaking patterns of Korean-English bilingual. The Journal of Linguistics Science, 68 1, 39–72.Google Scholar
Kweon, S. (2016). Thinking for speaking in motion event descriptions by Korean-English bilinguals. Korean Journal of Applied Linguistics, 32 (4), 119–147. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Larrañaga, P., Treffers-Daller, J., Tidball, F., & Ortega, M. C. G. (2012). L1 transfer in the acquisition of manner and path in Spanish by native speakers of English. International Journal of Bilingualism, 16 (1), 117–138. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Li, P., Eskildsen, S. W., & Cadierno, T. (2014). Tracing an L2 learner’s motion constructions over time: A usage-based classroom investigation. The Modern Language Journal, 98 (2), 612–628. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Matsumoto, Y., Akita, K., & Takahashi, K. (2017). The functional nature of deictic verbs and the coding patterns of Deixis. In I. Ibarretxe-Antuñano (Ed.), Motion and space across languages: Theory and applications (pp. 95–122). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ministry of Education. (2015). Curriculum for English language education. Seoul: Ministry of Education.Google Scholar
Muñoz, M., & Cadierno, T. (2019). Mr Bean exits the garage driving or does he drive out of the garage? Bidirectional transfer in the expression of Path. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 57 (1), 45–69. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Navarro, S., & Nicoladis, E. (2005). Describing motion events in adult L2 Spanish narratives. In D. Eddington (Ed.), Selected proceedings of the 6th conference on the acquisition of Spanish and Portuguese as first and second languages (pp. 102–107). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.Google Scholar
Oh, K.-J. (2003). Language, cognition, and development: Motion events in English and Korean. Doctoral dissertation, University of California, Berkeley, US.
Omaggio, A. (1986). Teaching language in context: Proficiency-oriented instruction. Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle.Google Scholar
Özçaliskan, S. (2015). Ways of crossing a spatial boundary in typologically distinct languages. Applied Psycholinguistics, 36 (2), 485–508. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Özyürek, A. (2002). Speech-gesture relationship across languages and in second language learners: Implications for spatial thinking and speaking. Proceedings of the 26th annual Boston University conference on language development (pp. 500–509). Boston, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Papafragou, A., Massey, C., & Gleitman, L. (2002). Shake, rattle,‘n’roll: The representation of motion in language and cognition. Cognition, 84 (2), 189–219. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Park, H., & Ziegler, N. (2014). Cognitive shift in the bilingual mind: Spatial concepts in Korean–English bilinguals. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 17 (2), 410–430. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Park, Y. (2008). Expressing motion events in two typologically different languages: Language transfer of path and manner expressions. Language Research, 44 (1), 193–222.Google Scholar
Pavlenko, A. (2011). Thinking and speaking in two languages. Bristol: Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pourcel, S. (2004). What makes path of motion salient? Proceedings of the 30th annual meeting of Berkeley Linguistics Society (pp. 505–516). Berkeley, CA: Berkeley Linguistics Society. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez, F. J., & Agustín Llach, M. P. (2016). Cognitive pedagogical grammar and meaning construction in L2. In S. de Knop & G. Gilquin (Eds.), Applied construction grammar (pp. 151–183). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Selinker, L. (1972). Interlanguage. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 10 1, 209–232. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Slobin, D. I. (1996). From “thought and language” to “thinking for speaking”. In J. Gumperz, J. John & S. C. Levinson (Eds.), Rethinking linguistic relativity (pp. 70–96). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
(1997). Mind, code, and text. In J. Bybee, J. Haiman & S. A. Thompson (Eds.), Essays on language function and language type: Dedicated to T. Givón (pp. 437–467). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2003). Language and thought online: Cognitive consequences of linguistic relativity. In D. Gentner & S. Goldin-Meadow (Eds.), Language in mind: Advances in the study of language and thought (pp. 157–191). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
(2004). The many ways to search for a frog: Linguistic typology and the expression of motion events. In S. Strömqvist & L. Verhoeven (Eds.), Relating events in narrative: Typological and contextual perspectives (pp. 219–257). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
(2006). What makes manner of motion salient? Explorations in linguistic typology, discourse, and cognition. In M. Hickmann & S. Robert (Eds.), Space in languages: Linguistic systems and cognitive categories (pp. 59–81). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stam, G. (2006). Thinking for speaking about motion: L1 and L2 speech and gesture. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 44 (2), 145–171. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2010). Can an L2 speaker’s patterns of thinking for speaking change? In Z. Han & T. Cadierno (Eds.) Linguistic relativity (pp. 59–83). Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2016). Gesture as a window onto conceptualization in multiple tasks: Implications for second language teaching. Yearbook of the German Cognitive Linguistics Association, 4 (1), 289–314. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2017). Verb-framed, satellite-framed or in between? A L2 learner’s thinking for speaking in her L1 and L2 over 14 years. In I. Ibarretxe-Antuñano (Ed.), Motion and space across languages: Theory and applications (pp. 329–366). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Strömqvist, S., Nordqvist, A. & Wengelin, A. (2004). Writing the frog story: Developmental and cross-modal perspectives. In S. Strömqvist & L. Verhoeven (Eds.), Relating events in narrative: Typological and contextual perspectives (pp. 359–394). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Talmy, L. (1985). Lexicalization patterns: Semantic structure in lexical forms. In T. Shopen (Ed.), Language typology and syntactic description: Volume 3 (pp. 71–149). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
(1991). Path to realization: A typology of event conflation. In Proceedings of the 17th annual meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society (pp. 480–519). Berkeley, CA: Berkeley Linguistics Society. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2000). Language, speech, and communication. Toward a cognitive semantics, Vol. II: Typology and process in concept structuring. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
(2017). Past, present, and future of motion research. In I. Ibarretxe-Antuñano (Ed.), Motion and space across languages: Theory and applications (pp. 1–12). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Verhelst, N., Van Avermaet, P., Takala, S., Figueras, N., & North, B. (2009). Common European framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Yu, L. (1996). The role of L1 in the acquisition of motion verbs in English by Chinese and Japanese learners. Canadian Modern Language Review, 53 (1), 191–218. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Sung, Min-Chang, Kitaek Kim & Bora Nam
2024. Influence of topic-prominent L1s on the use of L2 English copula be: a corpus-based study. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 26 december 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.